Re: OpenSSH3.5p1 vs. Commercial SSH 3.2
From: Philip Brown (phil+s3@bolthole.no-bots.com)
Date: 01/30/03
- Next message: Darren Tucker: "Re: OpenSSH3.5p1 vs. Commercial SSH 3.2"
- Previous message: Nico Kadel-Garcia: "Re: non-interactive sftp question"
- In reply to: Darren Tucker: "Re: OpenSSH3.5p1 vs. Commercial SSH 3.2"
- Next in thread: Darren Tucker: "Re: OpenSSH3.5p1 vs. Commercial SSH 3.2"
- Reply: Darren Tucker: "Re: OpenSSH3.5p1 vs. Commercial SSH 3.2"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: phil+s3@bolthole.no-bots.com (Philip Brown) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 07:00:31 GMT
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003 22:35:50 GMT, dtucker@dodgy.net.au wrote:
>...
>The earlier patches in that bug do, but the one I referenced doesn't,
>it adds a privsep wrapper for do_pam_chauthtok().
Hmm. Is it scheduled for inclusion in an upcoming official openssh release?
-- http://www.blastwave.org/ for solaris pre-packaged binaries with pkg-get Sign up to maintain a package for your own favourite software! [Trim the no-bots from my address to reply to me by email!] S.1618 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:SN01618:@@@D http://www.spamlaws.com/state/ca1.html
- Next message: Darren Tucker: "Re: OpenSSH3.5p1 vs. Commercial SSH 3.2"
- Previous message: Nico Kadel-Garcia: "Re: non-interactive sftp question"
- In reply to: Darren Tucker: "Re: OpenSSH3.5p1 vs. Commercial SSH 3.2"
- Next in thread: Darren Tucker: "Re: OpenSSH3.5p1 vs. Commercial SSH 3.2"
- Reply: Darren Tucker: "Re: OpenSSH3.5p1 vs. Commercial SSH 3.2"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|